W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-esw-thes@w3.org > November 2003

Inter-vocab mapping

From: Miles, AJ (Alistair) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:23:03 -0000
Message-ID: <350DC7048372D31197F200902773DF4C04943FB8@exchange11.rl.ac.uk>
To: 'Danny Ayers' <danny666@virgilio.it>, public-esw-thes@w3.org, "Nikki Rogers (E-mail)" <Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk>

Hi Danny,

I'm just working on a write-up of the cross-vocab mapping problem, with
potential solutions.  Coming soon!

Nikki - interesting use case here?  Mapping from an open blog categorisation
scheme to an open web directory. Quite different from library-type apps with
coherent managed collections, much more open-world. 

Al.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Danny Ayers [mailto:danny666@virgilio.it]
> Sent: 11 November 2003 16:54
> To: Miles, AJ (Alistair) ; public-esw-thes@w3.org
> Subject: RE: NEW issue 6 - defining semantic relationships
> 
> 
> One of the immediate applications that occurs to me for RDF 
> thesauruses is
> in mapping between discrete taxonomies. Whatever approach to defining
> relationships is adopted, I hope it will be straightforward 
> to take a tree
> like the Open Directory website categorization [1] and be 
> able to map across
> to corresponding terms in another hierarchy like the Topic 
> Exchange [2], and
> carry out merge-like operations (I say merge-like because the 
> structures may
> be incompatible, and class/subclass relationships may only 
> work in localized
> regions of the trees).
> 
> Cheers,
> Danny.
> 
> [1] http://dmoz.org/
> [2] http://topicexchange.com/
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-esw-thes-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:public-esw-thes-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Miles, 
> AJ (Alistair)
> >
> > Sent: 11 November 2003 16:33
> > To: 'public-esw-thes@w3.org'
> > Subject: NEW issue 6 - defining semantic relationships
> >
> >
> >
> > I've added this issue to the RDF Thesaurus ESW Wiki.
> >
> > http://esw.w3.org/topic/RdfThesaurus?action=show
> >
> > Short summary:
> >
> > Issue 6 - Defining semantic relationships
> >
> > Description: A thesaurus consists of concepts, labels for 
> concepts, and
> > semantic relationships between concepts. A semantic 
> relationship is a
> > relationship of meaning. Most thesauri use a similar set of semantic
> > relationships, which they label 'broader' 'narrower' and 'related'.
> >
> > Problem 1: 'broader/narrower' means different things in different
> > thesauri.
> > In some thesauri it means strictly class-subsumption. In 
> other thesauri it
> > can mean either is-a, instance-of, or part-of. Also 'related' is not
> > consistently used. For example some thesauri model part-of 
> relations with
> > 'related', others use 'broader/narrower'
> >
> > => We must invent some mechanism for providing clear definitions
> > of semantic
> > relationships, and for removing any scope for ambiguity.
> >
> > Problem 2: some thesauri have semantic relations other than
> > 'broader/narrower' and 'related'. Some overcome the 
> 'broader/narrower'
> > fuzziness by using 'BTI', 'BTG' and 'BTP', which stand for
> > 'broader-term-instantive' 'broader-term-generic' and
> > 'broader-term-partitive' respectively. In others there are custom
> > relationships like 'related-broader'.
> >
> > => We must provide some mechanism by which users can extend 
> the given
> > relationship set and define their own semantic relations.
> >
> > .....
> >
> >
> > Alistair Miles
> >
> > CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
> > Building R1 Room 1.60
> > Fermi Avenue
> > Chilton
> > Didcot
> > Oxfordshire OX11 0QX
> > United Kingdom
> >
> > Email:        a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk
> > Telephone: +44 (0)1235 445440
> >
> >
> 
Received on Tuesday, 11 November 2003 12:26:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:45:08 UTC